OH: “But with a little bit of perspective, and a lot of Heinlein…”
Month: May 2015
The luxury in self-reproach
There is a luxury in self-reproach. When we blame ourselves we feel no one else has a right to blame us.
— Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
Proposal: Designate commits as minor edits in Git
Git blame: A reliable rat
A great benefit of version control systems is that they make it possible to see who introduced substantive changes in the past. For example in Git,
git blame <file> will reveal who last edited each line of code in
Despite the cheeky name, the greatest value of
git blame isn’t so much blaming others for their mistakes, as identifying who to confer with when proposing changes. The last developer to touch a line of code may have an interest in its current state, can answer questions about it, and may have valuable perspective that will improve your proposed changes.
Slow standards adoption? Blame blame.
Unfortunately, this is an obstacle to the adoption of consistent code standards in an open source project like WordPress.
Any patches you make to legacy code whose soul purpose is applying coding standards, without introducing substantive changes, will make you appear as the last author in
git blame, losing valuable information about whoever made the last substantive changes. Thus, this type of edits is discouraged.
As a result, WordPress’ adoption of its own coding standards in core code slows way down.
This is a bummer, because there would be dozens of people happy to make core contributions strictly to apply code standards. It’d be a great way for newbies to learn the ropes while making incremental improvements to code quality.
How about “minor commits” that blame is blind to?
Wouldn’t it be nice if you could indicate that a change is minor edit when you commit it?
git blame would skip over these minor edits to display only substantive edits from older, non-minor commits. Obstacle to code standards adoption solved.
This could look something like
$ git commit --minor <file to commit>.
Implementation considerations (wherein I wade way out past my depth)
For this to work, I’m aware of at least three things that would need to change in Git’s internals:
- Implement the
--minorflag (or whatever) in
- Extend data model in commit blobs (the files where Git stores its object data) to include optional metadata that means “this is a minor edit”.
git blameaware of “this is a minor edit” metadata and crawl as far up the tree as needed to encounter an edit that is not minor.
Number 3 would add a bit of performance overhead to running
git blame. I could be way off here, but I doubt that’s a deal breaker.
Number 2 might be, though. The structure of commit blobs is super lean — just a reference to a tree describing the current file structure, the commit’s author, the commit message, and a reference to parent commit object(s). Nothing more. Thus, adding metadata to support this type of feature could increase every commit’s size by a significant percentage, and that would add up when applied to an entire repository’s object graph. Would that be justified by the limited utility that a minor edit functionality would add?
Perhaps this isn’t such a big issue, as that “minor” metadata flag could either be set to true, or be nonexistent and implied to be false. This would only take up more hard disk in the cases where
minor = true, instead of with 100% of commits.
Applying this to WordPress
I wrote this up with Git examples because I’m much more familiar with it, but WordPress still uses SVN for core development, and probably will for some time.
So until and unless WordPress completely migrates to Git, we’d also need an equivalent new “minor edit” feature added to SVN if we were e to benefit fully in WP developer land.